Soumyajit Bhar is a PhD student in Conservation Science &
Sustainability Studies at ATREE, Royal Enclave,Sriramapura, Jakkur
Post, Bangalore- 560 064, Office Ph No: +91 80 23635555, Mobile No:
+91 92315 05159 || +91 78468 83691, Email Id:
[email protected] || [email protected]
Dr. Abhijit Das, Assistant Professor, Department Of Economics
Kandi Raj College, Kandi, Murshidabad, West Bengal, Ph No: +91
94334 49642, Email Id: [email protected]
Corresponding Author: Soumyajit Bhar
Carbon Balance Estimation of Agricultural Practices through Evaluation of Paddy
Cultivation Processes – A Case Study in Murshidabad District, West Bengal (India)
Soumyajit Bhar, Abhijit Das
Abstract: Over last 4-5 decades, rampant usage of energy has significantly increased GHG emissions from agricultural sector. Though currently
available estimates don’t focus only on agriculture and also don’t include its carbon capture potential. Hence the picture presented is an incomplete one. On the other hand a more direct & focussed study has been conducted to measure the carbon balance of agricultural practices by incorporating the carbon capture potential of agriculture. This estimate will possibly provide a more appropriate picture of the existing status of agricultural emissions in-comparison to the other GHG emitting sectors. Field based study has been conducted on paddy cultivation as it’s one of the most significant GHG emitting agricultural practices. The study area has been chosen from Murshidabad district being one significant rice producing district of the highest rice producing state, West Bengal. Incorporating estimates from both the seasons the total agricultural GHG emissions from paddy cultivation estimated to be around 1374-2481 kg of CO2 equivalent/ha without including livestock and allied emissions and soil carbon loss occurred during cultivation. Including approximated emissions from livestock and manure management the emissions level will rise up to 1932-3377 kg/ha. The amount of CO2 equivalent of carbon being captured in the growth of paddy plants is being evaluated to be 14474-20880 kg/ha throughout the year. With these sets of evaluation it has been found that in both the considered seasons (monsoon & winter) the maximum emission accounted for only 20-21% of the total capture and thus the carbon balance of modern agriculture practices is still significantly negative. Hence the conclusion is that GHG emissions from systems, like agriculture, with carbon capture potential should not be compared directly with the other GHG emitting sectors without capture potential. Also it has been found that controlling the irrigation requirements in both the seasons may provide a comprehensive solution to reduce the overall agricultural GHG emissions through significant reduction in methane emission and lower operational emissions from irrigation requirements. Index Terms: Carbon Balance, Agricultural GHG Emission, Carbon Captured in Agriculture, Biomass Estimation, Climate Change, Energy Usage in Indian Agriculture, Climate Change & Paddy Cultivation.
Introduction: It is a fact that modern day agriculture is
one of the most significant GHG emitting sectors along
with other major GHG emitting sectors like energy or
industry. At present agriculture directly contributes 14%
of total global emissions and when combined with
related changes in land use including deforestation,
agriculture’s contribution rises to more than one-third of
total GHG emissions [1]. It has been reported that
agriculture contributes 17.6% of the total GHG emission
from India [2]. These estimates predominantly consider
the direct emissions in the forms of methane and N2O
emission, along with emissions from agricultural allied
sector like livestock management. In the total emission
from Indian agricultural system around 35.9% account
directly from methane emission from paddy field, N2O
emission from the soil and emission due to biomass
burning. The rest 64.1% accounts from livestock emission
and manure management. In the total emission from
Indian energy sector 3.1% account due to energy use,
except the use of grid electricity, in agriculture and
fisheries [2]. The operational1 GHG emission from
agriculture doesn’t get included in the estimate directly.
Rather the energy inputs2 required for agriculture are
being considered in the other GHG emitting sectors like
energy or industry. The operational emissions should be
integrated in the same estimate because these avenues
also possess a significant contribution to the overall
agricultural emissions. The global warming potential of
1 Emissions from fertilizer production processes, tillage,
irrigation and transportation requirements.
2 Direct energies used in agriculture are either electricity or
fossil fuels, mainly diesel.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
719
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
conventional agriculture is strongly affected by the use of
synthetic nitrogen fertilizers and by high nitrogen
concentrations in soil. Global nitrogen fertilizer
consumption (produced by fossil energy) in 2005 was
90.86 million tonnes [3]. It takes approximately 90 million
tonnes of fossil fuel (diesel equivalent) to produce
nitrogen fertilizer. This is about 1% of global fossil
energy consumption [4]. So to get a more appropriate
estimation of agricultural emissions it would be essential
to include the following in an estimate: Under
Operational emissions i) the direct use of fossil fuels in
farm operations; ii) the indirect use of embodied energy
in inputs that are energy-intensive to manufacture
(particularly fertilizers); Under Direct emissions iii) loss
of soil organic matter or carbon due to cultivation of
soils, iv) methane emitted due to paddy cultivation, v)
N2O emission from soil and emission due to biomass
burning.
On the other hand, agriculture is also an accumulator of
carbon, offsetting losses when organic matter is
accumulated in the soil, or when above-ground woody
biomass acts either as a permanent sink or is used as an
energy source that acts as substitute for other fossil fuels
usage. In the discussed estimates the carbon capture
potential of agriculture also has not been included. At
present the frequencies of cultivation have also
increased. Currently through out the year a land is being
cultivated approximately 2-3 times. Sometime it goes up
to even 3-4 times. This increased cultivation frequency
has proportionately enlarged the scope of carbon capture
through biomass accumulation in various crops. Hence,
instead of just measuring the GHG emissions level, it is
necessary to evaluate the net carbon balance of
agricultural practices in developing countries
considering both emissions and absorptions. This will
eventually present an appropriate and rather pragmatic
view on the effective contribution of GHG from
agricultural sector in comparison to other significant
GHG emitting sectors like industry, transportation or
energy.
In this context paddy cultivation practices, due to the
methane emissions, is one of the most significant
contributors of total agricultural GHG emission,
especially in India. Methane emission level is 20.9% of
the total amount of emission from agriculture,
amounting to 69.87 million ton of CO2’s equivalent [2].
As paddy is the principle crop of West Bengal, the state
accounts for the highest amount of methane emission
from the paddy fields among the other states of India [5].
Hence it is imperative to measure the carbon balance of
Paddy cultivation in West Bengal to capture the overall
picture of carbon balance of various crops cultivated
throughout India. This will generate a holistic picture of
the entire agricultural sector of the country in this
context.
Materials and Methodology:
Study area
Murshidabad district is selected as the study area
because of its Rice productivity stands in forth positions
(2806.3 kg/Ha) among the other 18 rice producing
districts of West Bengal. Monsoon and winter paddy are
predominantly
cultivated in
this district.
Though in
some areas of
the district for
another season
paddy is being
cultivated, but
this study has
concentrated
only on
monsoon and
winter paddy cultivation.
From the Murshidabad district, Kandi block is only being
considered as it possess 5th and 3rd positions among the
other blocks in terms of total paddy cultivated area
throughout the year and total paddy production level
respectively. The map of the block is given in Fig. 1. Its
geographical area and population are 238.54 km2 and
192,952 (2001 Census report) respectively. For monsoon
and winter paddy cultivation 68% and 63% of total area
of the block is being utilized respectively. Throughout
the block, 206 families are being surveyed over 15
villages and covering all its Gram Panchayats (10 GPs).
This research has used two levels of methodologies. First
level is used for the collection of primary data from the
selected field areas. Second level is applied to compile
those collected primary data sets to meet the research
objectives.
Fig1: Map of Kandi Community Development Block
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
720
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
Primary data has been collected through interview based
method. Samples were taken from the selected study
areas, through random sampling among the families
directly related with agriculture especially paddy
cultivation. Individual interviews and focussed group
discussions have been conducted to collect data sets and
to cross check them for validation and authentication.
In the process of evaluating the amount of carbon
captured, both soil carbon loss and sequestration has not
been considered as this study focussed predominantly on
the crop cycle. The emission due to biomass burning also
has not been considered, being very negligible and not
being a common practice in paddy cultivation.
Methodology for Emission Evaluation
• The standard GHG emissions potential of various
fertilizers during its manufacturing is being
considered from different literatures. Generally in
the study areas, four kinds of fertilizers are
predominantly used. These are Urea (46:0:0), DAP
(18:46:0), NPK (10:26:26), MOP (0:0:60). Now the
amount of CO2 equivalent of GHG emitted in
production of per kg of the Urea is 1848.7 g, DAP is
866.2 g [6] and MOP is 340 g [7]. As NPK (10:26:26)
emission level is not available in any literature hence
to calculate that it’s constitutes are being used
considering their respective percentage. The
predominant constitutes of NPK (10:26:26)3 are Urea,
TSP, MOP and their emission levels are respectively
601g, 170g, 340g per kg of production [7]. With these
values the emission level of NPK (10:26:26) is
appraised to be 280 g per kg of production. In
Kongshaug, 1998 the methane emission during
fertilizer production has not been considered where
Davis and Haglund, 1999 has considered that [8].
The average ratio of the estimates of Urea and DAP
from both the literatures are being considered as a
multiplication factor to include the methane
emission from production in the estimates of NPK
(10:26:26) and MOP. The emission level of Urea and
DAP in Kongshaug, 1998 is 610 g and 460 g
respectively for per kg of production. So the ratios of
these two estimates are 0.32 and 0.53 respectively.
3 NPK (10:26:26) have different constitutes but the stated in the
paper is the most common one.
The average ratio or the multiplication factor has
been derived to be 0.42. So the final estimates of
NPK (10:26:26) and MOP considering the average
multiplication factor is being evaluated to be 886 g
and 810 g per kg of production. The emissions from
transportation requirements in fertilizers production
processes for only DAP is available in Davis and
Haglund, 1999 among the other fertilizers that has
been considered in this literature. The corresponding
emissions level from DAP is 211.3 g per kg [6]. This
stated amount for DAP has been used for the other
fertilizers also. The final estimates considering the
transportation emission during manufacturing of
Urea, DAP, NPK (10:26:26) and MOP are 2060 g,
1077.5 g, 1097.3 g, 1021.3 g per kg of production
respectively.
• The GHG emissions from irrigation sectors will be
evaluated on the basis of the following ways, based
on the type of operation of the irrigation methods.
• In case of pump set is run by electricity, according to
the wattage of the pump set, 0.94 kg CO2 emission
level per unit of electricity production in eastern
zone of India during 2009-10 [9] will be used to
calculate the total emissions occurred during
irrigation.
• In case of pump set run by diesel, emission factor for
diesel of 2.67 kg/lt [10] will be multiplied with the
amount of diesel consumed to calculate the emission.
• The GHG emissions for the tillage and transport
requirement in agriculture will be evaluated from
the amount of fuel used (generally diesel) in litres
and the emission factors expressed in kg/lt. For
diesel it is 2.67 kg/lt [10].
• If bullocks are being used for tillage, the GHG
(predominantly methane) emissions due to enteric
fermentation of bovine stock and due to manure
management will be evaluated. The emissions rates
of methane due to enteric fermentation of non-dairy
indigenous cow 20 kg/animal/year and the same for
manure management is 1.85 kg/animal/year [11].
• The methane emission levels from paddy field are
being taken as 2.01±1.49 g/m2 for irrigated
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
721
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
intermittently flooded multiple aeration zones and
6.62±1.89g/m2 for irrigated intermittently flooded
single aeration zones4 [5] Methane’s Global Warming
Potential (GWP) will be taken as 21 times of CO2
according to IPCC standard.
• The N2O emission factor from soil is 0.3 kg/acre or
0.76 kg/Ha for paddy cultivation where urea is
directly used without any inhibitors5 [12]. GWP of
N2O will be considered as 298 times of CO2 according
to IPCC standard.
Methodology for Capture Evaluation
• The percentage of carbon present in rice straw and
husk will be used to evaluate the amount of carbon in
the above ground biomass. These percentages are 39
and 44 by weight respectively [13]. The average root to
shoot ratio of four considered ecotypes on Indica
lowland rice varieties has been found to be 0.13 [14].
This value will be used to evaluate the carbon content6
of the root biomass. After the harvest generally around
10% by height above ground biomass left in the field
along with the root biomass. The weight of the above
ground left-over biomass is also assumed to be 10% of
the weight of the harvested straw. Hence the net
weight of the left-over biomass will be 23%7 of the net
harvested straw.
• Generally the rice grain content 80% of carbohydrates
and approximately 6% of protein, 2% of fat [15].
Adequate literatures are not available to estimate the
4 These two zones, out of other five possible zones have been
considered because of there apparent prevalence in the selected
field area.
5 Inhibitor or Urease inhibitors reduce the initial atmospheric
loss of surface applied urea by reducing the conversion of urea
to ammonium. Nitrification inhibitors slow the subsequent
process of converting ammonium to nitrate, and hence to
nitrous oxide in soil which is then released into the atmosphere.
Source: Website of Department of Climate Change and Energy
Efficiency, Australian Government.
6 Percentage of carbon content of the root biomass has been
taken same as that of the straw.
7 Root biomass being 13% has been evaluated from root to shoot
ratio of 0.13.
exact chemical compositions of proteins and fats
present in various rice grains. Thus Carbon content of
rice grain is being approximated from carbohydrate’s
carbon content, considering its amount to be 88%8 by
weight.
Result:
Emission from Fertilizer Production
Following two sets of fertilizers application strategies
have been observed in the study area:
Set 1: DAP and MOP are being used in the time of soil
preparation. Later Urea is applied separately.
Set 2: NPK (10:26:26) and Urea are being used in the time
of soil preparation. Later Urea is applied again.
The collected data sets of fertilizers application levels
show a high variation. For all the fertilizers the amount
been applied is considered in three levels: maximum,
average and minimum to get a complete picture of the
emissions due to fertilizers production.
Considering the above two sets of usages and the three
levels of fertilizer application in each sets, total six CO2
equivalent emission levels from fertilizers production
have been calculated for both monsoon (Table 1A) and
winter (Table 1B).
Considering both the sets final estimates of CO2
equivalent emission from fertilizer production for
monsoon season are within 338.9-620.6 kg/ha and for
winter are within 502.8-773.1 kg/ha.
Emission from Irrigation Requirements
It has been found that over last few decades the use of
underground aquifer for meeting irrigation needs have
increased in the study area. Due to the use of
underground aquifer the electricity operated submersible
pumps, instead of diesel driven pumps, are
predominantly being used especially in winter. Actually
winter paddy cultivation is completely irrigation
dependent. Even in the monsoon due to erratic rainfall9,
8 Including the amount of protein i.e. 6% and fat i.e. 2% by
weight is equivalent to that of carbohydrate.
9 According to the farmers the distribution of rainfall has
reduced. Hence during the critical period of the paddy
cultivation, even in monsoon, irrigation is required.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
722
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
Table 1A Estimation of Emission
from Fertilizer Production in
Monsoon Season
Table 1B: Estimation of Emission from Fertilizer
Production in Winter Season
significant amount of irrigation is required. The amount
is estimated to be around one third of that of winter
season. Still it is an average approximated estimate
because the irrigation requirements are completely
dependent on timing and quantity of rainfall in a
particular season. The detailed calculation for winter is
shown in Table 2.
The final estimate of emissions varies within the range of
501.6-626.8 kg of CO2 equivalent/ha in case of winter. In
case of monsoon the estimate will be around 167.2-208.9
kg of CO2 equivalent/ha considering it
is one third of the winter season’s
emission.
Emission from Tillage Requirements:
It has been observed in the study area
that normal tractor is predominantly
being used for tillage. In some areas
though mechanized hand tractor is
being used, yet its usage is very
limited. Fuel consumption level of the
mechanised hand tractor is almost same as the normal
tractor. Hence the emission level is being calculated as
per the use of normal tractor.
Generally for paddy in every season
the field is being tilled for 4 times. This
fact has been considered to calculate
the duration of tractor usage in each
season. As now a day’s bullock based
tilling is very rare10 so the methane
emission from bullock due to enteric
fermentation has not been considered.
The detailed estimation is available in
Table 3. The CO2 equivalent emitted
due to tillage in both seasons is
around 78.8-98.8 kg/ha irrespective
whether it is hand or normal tractor.
Emission from Transport Requirement
The transport requirements for
agriculture mainly accounts for the
following two areas:
� Due to fertilizers or other inputs transportation.
� Due to transportation of the final produce to the
market. In this case it is the transportation of rice
grain to rice mill.
10 Bullock driven ploughing has been rare due to the amount of
time required for ploughing compared to mechanized modes,
lack of availability of labour for bullock driven tilling and also
due to the insufficient availability of fodder for the bullock
throughout the year.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
723
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
Table 2: Estimation of Emission from Irrigation
Requirements
Table 3: Estimation of Emission from Tillage
In the first case due to high demand, the fertilizers shops
are available within the vicinity of the villages. Farmers
generally carry the fertilizers on their bicycle or in a
paddle van. So there is no question of GHG emission
from these types of transportation means.
In the second case, the average distance of the nearest
rice mill from each village and the fuel required for per
kg of produce to cover that distance in a standard goods
carrying vehicle, are being used to evaluate the amount
of emissions from the transportation requirements. The
amount of CO2 equivalent emitted in g per kg of the
produce is being evaluated in Table 4 to be 4.4-5.1 g/kg.
Now considering the primary production level in
monsoon and winter to be 3705-4446 kg/ha and 4446-
5187 kg/ha, the total emission due to produce
transportation will be 16.3-22.7 kg/ha and 19.6-26.4 kg/ha
respectively.
Table 4: Estimation of Emission from Transport
Requirement
Emission from the Anaerobic Zone in the Paddy Field
In the study area it has been observed during the winter
season, the water level in the field goes down more than
once. In monsoon around 50% areas it goes down more
than once and in the rest it goes down at least once.
Hence emission level of monsoon is being estimated by
averaging the emission levels of irrigated intermittently
flooded multiple aeration zone and the intermittently
flooded single aeration zone. Thus the evaluated
emission level for the monsoon is 4.32±1.69 g/m2. Finally
methane emission level derived to be 43200±16900 g/ha
or 43.2±16.9 kg/ha in monsoon and 20100±14900 g/ha or
20.1±14.9 kg/ha for winter. Considering the GWP of
methane the final emission level will be 907.2±355 kg/ha
in monsoon and 422.1±313 kg/ha of CO2 equivalent in
winter season.
Emission of N2O from Soil
Excess application of nitrogenous fertilizers is the main
cause of N2O emission from the soil. Considering the
GWP of N2O the final emission level will be 226.5 kg/ha
of CO2 equivalent in both monsoon and winter seasons.
Evaluation of Amount of Carbon Captured
In case of rice grain and husk the amount measured in
terms of their weight can be directly used for the
estimation. In villages the common notion of
measurement of straw is not by weight rather it is
measured in terms of volume. Thus an action research is
being conducted to measure weight of a standard
volume of straw. Weight of straw depends on the
amount of water present in a particular sample, hence
samples of different dryness have been considered. The
weight range is derived to be 350-400 g/Aati11 or 28-32
kg/pon. In general the primary production level of
paddy in monsoon is around 3705-4446 kg/ha while it is
4446-5187 kg/ha in winter. Generally during husking
around 67% of rice grain is being produced and the rest
is husk. Considering these percentages the level of rice
grain production in monsoon and winter seasons will be
2470-2964 kg/ha and 2964-3458 kg/ha respectively. The
same for the husk will be 1235-1482 kg/ha and 1482-1729
kg/ha. Straw production level in monsoon varies
11 Aati is the lowest unit of volume used to measure the amount
of straw. The next higher unit of volume is Pon (1 Pon=80 Aati).
The highest unit generally used is Kahan(1Kahan= 16 Pon).
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
724
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
between 185-207 pon/ha whereas it is around 200-237
pon/ha in winter season.
The amount of CO2 equivalent captured in per kg of rice
grain is being estimated in Table 5 to be 1291 g. The same
for the husk is being estimated in Table 6 to be 1558 g.
Considering the production level, the amount of CO2
equivalent captured in the rice grain is within 3188.8 –
3826.5 kg/ha in monsoon and 3826.5-4464.3 kg/ha in
winter. Similarly for the husk it is 1924.1-2308.9 kg/ha in
monsoon and 2308.9-2693.8 kg/ha in winter. So, total CO2
Table 5: Estimation of CO2 Equivalent Carbon Captured
in Rice Grain
Table 6: Estimation of CO2 Equivalent Carbon Captured
in Husk
equivalent has been captured in the aggregate primary
produce of Paddy (entire Paddy grain) is 5112.9- 6135.4
kg/ha in monsoon season and 6135.4 - 7158.1 kg/ha in
winter.
In Table 7 the amount of CO2 equivalent present in straw
has been evaluated to be 50.6-57.9 kg/pon. Considering
the amount of straw production in monsoon and winter,
the emission levels are 9361-11985 kg/ha and 10120-13722
kg/ha of CO2 equivalent respectively.
Table 7: Estimation of CO2 Equivalent Carbon Captured
in Straw and Root Biomass
Total amount of CO2 equivalent stored in paddy
cultivation in monsoon and winter are 14473.9-18120.4
kg/ha and 16255.4-20880.1 kg/ha respectively.
Operational Emission Details
In Table 8 all the different operational emissions have
been summarised and total operational emission has
been calculated to be 601.3-951kg/ha and 1102.9-1525.1
Table 8: Summary of Operational Emissions
kg/ha of CO2 equivalent in monsoon and winter
respectively. The seasonal variations of emissions level
from different operational avenues have been shown in
the Fig 2.
Fig 2: seasonal distribution of Average Operational
Emission.
Direct Emission Details
In Table 9 different direct emissions have been
summarised and total direct emission has been evaluated
as 772.7-1482.7 kg/ha and 329.6-955.6 kg/ha of CO2
equivalent in monsoon and winter respectively.
Table 9: Summary of Direct Emissions
In Fig 3 the seasonal variation of different direct
emissions have been given and in Fig 4 the distribution
of total yearly average of operational & direct emission
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
725
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
has been shown. In Fig 5 seasonal distributions of total
average operational and direct emission has been
plotted.
Fig 3: Seasonal Distribution of Average Direct Emission
Fig 4: Yearly Average Operational and Direct Emission
Fig 5: Distribution of Seasonal Average Operational and
Direct Emission
Evaluation of Carbon Balance
In Table 10 total operational and direct emission
throughout the seasons has been used to evaluate the
seasonal total emission from paddy cultivation. The total
emission is 1374-2433.7 kg/ha in monsoon and 1432.5-
2480.7 kg/ha during winter in terms of CO2 equivalence.
Carbon balance also has been evaluated in the Table 10.
As the amount of CO2 equivalent emitted is significantly
less than the amount being captured so instead of
subtracting the latter from the former, the emissions has
been expressed in terms of percentage to the amount that
has been captured. With this method, the carbon balance
has been evaluated as 9.5-13.5 percent in monsoon and
8.8-11.9 percent in winter. The seasonal distribution of
Table 10: Evaluation of Carbon Balance & Ratio of
Operational and Direct Emissions
total average emission and total average capture has
been shown in the Fig 6.
Fig 6: Distribution of Average Seasonal Carbon Emission
and Captured
Discussion
In this paper, it shows that through out the year average
operational emission slightly exceeds the average direct
emission. Hence in this estimate around 67% of the total
emission12 has been included of the emission level
estimated considering livestock emissions in overall
agricultural emission. Now if the rest 33% can be taken
into account to the estimated carbon balance then it will
become at par with the emission evaluation framework
used for most of the studies as well as MoEF, 2007. In
that case the carbon balance will maximum shift up to
20-21 percent.
From another perspective, it can be argued that the
amount of carbon captured in agriculture is not really a
permanent capture as rice grain will get consumed and
husk or straw either will become rural fuel or fodder.
12Direct emissions (methane emissions and N2O emissions)
contribute around 33.5% (approx.) (MoEF, 2007) of the total
estimate, evaluated including the livestock emission. Consider
operational emission equal to direct emission total contribution
by both of the avenues become 67%.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
726
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
Ultimately the captured carbon will get converted into
different carbon compounds and eventually will get back
to the atmosphere. Yet in each of the usages (i.e. rice
grain used as food and the secondary produce used as
fuel and fodder) the net emission should not be
considered by just converting the amount of carbon
captured directly to CO2 equivalent depending on the
process of conversion. Rather it should be evaluated by
considering the socio-economic value of the usages and
the potential emission from the possible substitution of
those materials. Like agriculture, there are systems which
may emit certain amount of GHG in their natural course
of operation but those systems generally provide a huge
social and economic benefit. Instead of just evaluating
how much CO2 will be emitted when straw will be
burned, the economic and social benefit of the burning
(i.e. the benefit and necessity of cooking and also the
emission level of the substitution i.e. may be LPG or
Kerosene) should be considered to derive the effective or
net emission only then it will capture the full spectrum.
Hence although the amount of carbon captured in paddy
cultivation will not remain in the same state still it is
worth to consider for evaluating the carbon balance, as it
can’t be directly translated into the equivalent CO2
emission, ignoring the social benefit.
Thus significant carbon balance reveals that though it has
been well discussed through out the world that
agriculture is one of the main contributors of the GHG
emissions yet it demands a thoughtful re-examination. In
this context the impact of the inclusion of both soil
carbon loss and sequestration into the carbon balance
evaluation, presents a serious scope of research. As
World Bank, 2012 [16] pointed out various agricultural
activities like tillage operation, excessive fertilizers use
are causing soil carbon loss of 0.7 to 2.1 Gt of carbon per
year at a world scale. Also Lal, 2004 [17] has concluded
that cultivated soils have lost one-half to two-thirds of
the original SOC13 pool with a cumulative loss of 30–40
Mg14 C/ha. Considering its current level though this
inclusion will definitely shift carbon balance towards
being more neutral but still it may remain considerably
negative.
From the evaluated relative contribution of different
avenues of GHG emissions, it can be concluded that if
13 Soil Organic Carbon 14 Mg= mega gram=106g=1 ton
the amount of water stagnation in the paddy field can be
controlled then significant reduction of the total GHG
emission is possible due to decline in the methane
emission. It will also lower the emissions from irrigation
requirements due to less demand of water. In this context
a new method of rice cultivation called system of rice
intensification mainly focussing on the controlling
irrigation requirements in paddy cultivation, can be
examined to evaluate the potential reduction of GHG
emissions. Among the different methods of rice crop
establishment, lowest seasonal CH4 emission (19.93
kg/ha) and GWP (498.25 kg CO2/ ha) coupled with higher
water productivity was recorded with SRI method [18].
In these circumstances the other avenues of operational
emissions especially the amount of fertilizer used solely
depends on the farmer’s choice and on other different
social and economic factors. Thus it is difficult to
generalize and not well thought through measures to
reduce operational emissions may induce significant
decrease in the productivity. As Buresh and Witt, 2008
[19] rightly stated that across Asia, yields of irrigated rice
in the absence of fertilizer N are consistently insufficient
to meet food needs and achieve highest profit for
farmers.
Conclusion
At last it can be concluded that this focussed carbon
balance evaluation process is the most appropriate to
evaluate GHG emission level of those sectors which have
a natural capability of capturing carbon during their
normal course of operation. In this context sectors
without any carbon capture potential i.e. energy and
industry sectors can be called as completely GHG
dependent sectors where as agricultural sector can be
named as the GHG recycling sector.
Acknowledgment: Not required.
References:
[1] Bockel, L., G. Smith, M. Bromhead, M. Bernoux,
M. Tinlot, H. Matieu, and G. Branca, 2010,
“Mainstreaming carbon balance appraisal of
agriculture projects and policies?,” Policy brief
by Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, FAO. Rome, Italy, 19p.
[2] MoEF, 2010, “India: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
2007,” Indian Network for Climate Change
Assessment. Ministry of Environment and
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
727
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
Forests (MoEF), Government of India, New
Delhi, India, 84p.
[3] Beever, D., F. Brentrup, P. Eveillard, P. Fixen, P.
Heffer. B. Herz, R. Larson, et al. 2007.
“Sustainable Management of the Nitrogen Cycle
in Agriculture and Mitigation of Reactive
Nitrogen Side Effects,”Task force on Reactive
Nitrogen, International Fertilizer Industry
Association. Paris, France, 32p.
[4] Niggli, U., H. Schmid, and A. Fliessbach, 2007
“Organic Farming and Climate Change,”
Briefing prepared by the Research Institute of
Organic Agriculture FiBL, Frick, Switzerland, for
the International Trade Centre ITC, Geneva,
Switzerland, 23p.
[5] Gupta, P. K., V. Gupta, C. Sharma, S. N. Das, N.
Purkait, T. K. Adhya, H. Pathak, et al. 2009,
“Development of Methane Emission Factors for
Indian Paddy Fields and Estimation of National
Methane Budget,” Chemosphere 74 (4): 590-598.
[6] Davis, J. and C.,Haglund, 1999, “Life Cycle
Inventory (LCI) of Fertiliser Production.
Fertiliser Products Used in Sweden and Western
Europe,”SIK-Report No. 654. Masters Thesis,
Chalmers University of Technology, 166p.
[7] Kongshaug, G, 1998, “Energy Consumption and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Fertilizer
Production,” Presented at IFA Technical
Conference, International Fertilizer Industry
Association, 19p.
[8] Wood, S., and A. Cowie, 2004, “A Review of
Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors for Fertiliser
Production,” Prepared for IEA Bioenergy Task
38, 20p.
[9] Mittal, M. L., C. Sharma, and R. Singh, 2012,
”Estimates of Emissions from Coal Fired
Thermal Power Plants in India,” Accessed
December 12th, 2012. http:
//www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei20/session
5/mmittal.pdf . 22p.
[10] Defra, 2011, “2011 Guidelines to Defra / DECC's
GHG Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting,” Produced by AEA for the
Department of Energy and Climate Change
(DECC) and the Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), 50p.
[11] Swamy, M., and S. Bhattacharya, 2006,
“Budgeting Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gas
Emission from Indian Livestock Using Country-
Specific Emission Coefficients,” Current Science
91 (10): 1340-1353.
[12] Pathak, H, 1999, “Emissions of nitrous oxide
from soil,” Current Science 77 (3): 359-369
[13] Stahl,R., E. Henrich, H.J. Gehrmann, S. Vodegel,
and M. Koch, 2004, “Definition of a standard
biomass,” Report prepared under the framework
of project: RENEW – Renewable fuels for
advanced power trains, 14p.
[14] Matsuo, N., and T. Mochizuki, 2009, “Genotypic
Differences in Root Traits of Rice (Oryza Sativa
L.) Seedlings Grown Under Different Soil
Environments,” Plant root 3: 17-25.
[15] Rusydi, M., C. W. Noraliza, A. Azrina, and A.
Zulkhairi, 2011, “Nutritional changes in
germinated legumes and rice varieties,”
International Food Research Journal 18: 705-713.
[16] World Bank, 2012, “Carbon Sequestration in
Agricultural Soils,” Report No: 67385-GLB,
World Bank & Agriculture and Rural
Development. Washington DC, USA, 118p.
[17] Lal, R, 2004, “Soil Carbon sequestration to
mitigate climate change,” Geoderma 123: 1-22.
[18] Suryavanshi, P., Y. V. Singh, R. Prasanna, A.
Bhatia, and Y. S. Shivay, 2013, “Pattern of
methane emission and water productivity under
different methods of rice crop establishment,”
Paddy and Water Environment 11: 321-329.
[19] Buresh, R. J., and C. Watt, 2008, “Balancing
Fertilizer Use and Profit in Asia’s Irrigated Rice
Systems,” Better Crops 92 (8): 18-22.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 2, February-2014 ISSN 2229-5518
728
IJSER © 2014 http://www.ijser.org
IJSER
Top Related